= Premium Content

  • Monday, May 28, 2012

The Global Ticker

Previous

Next

Applications to British Universities Fall Ahead of Tuition Hike

January 30, 2012, 2:04 pm

Application figures released on Monday for the forthcoming academic year, the first in which higher tuition rates in much of Britain will be in effect, show a decline of 8.7 percent for applicants from Britain, with the biggest drop in England, where fees will nearly triple this autumn. The number of applications from European Union countries, whose students pay the same rate as domestic British students, decreased by 11.2 percent, but the number of applications from prospective students from outside the European Union, who pay much higher rates, rose by 13.7 percent.

The chief executive of Universities UK, which represents the vice chancellors of all British universities, said in a statement that the overall decrease in numbers was “far less dramatic than many were initially predicting,” adding that “we will have to look now in more detail at whether students from certain backgrounds have been deterred more than others.” David Willetts, the universities minister, emphasized in his statement that application figures tend to fluctuate during periods of reform, noting that the last time tuition was increased in 2006 applications from students in England, who were most directly affected by the change, fell initially by 2.9 percent before increasing by 6 percent the following year.

This entry was posted in Britain. Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • msumenglish

    Very suspicious.

  • 10293847

    Federal funding is bad for everyone except the “right” people.

  • nacrandell

    There are two worrisome issues:

    1) The question is how much of the Federal funds were awarded to their online students?

    From the article:
    “The rapid growth of Liberty’s online program has fueled the increased reliance on federal aid dollars, said Robert Ritz, LU’s executive director of financial aid.
    Last year, Liberty enrolled about 52,000 online students, plus another 12,000 through its residential programs…”

    If online universities do not require the real estate for classrooms, football fields and dormitories then why is there increase in costs? Liberty University deftly side steps the issue of government fund by saying that they receive the funds indirectly. Are their online programs offering potential students an accessible access to education for non-traditional students or simply packing large number of students with Federal funds into the courses for excessive profits?

    2) When does the exchange of ideas become necessary to limit within the educational community?

    In the play ‘1776’, Stephen Hopkins was credited saying, “I’ve never seen, heard, nor smelled an issue that was so dangerous it couldn’t be talked about. Hell yes, I’m for debating anything!” So why is an American university attempting to censor information about it’s financial records and what other sites and information have been or currently blocked?

  • raza_khan

    Not knowing much about LIberty’s student population, I am more interested in as to what they should have received in terms of funding typically for such institution!

    Raza
    _______________________
    Raza Khan, Ph.D.

  • hawkeye515

    Liberty University — well overdue for a name change.

  • chroniclejap

    nacrandall is correct – it is the students who received the federal funds (to help pay for their education). Not Liberty University (as the grant/loan recipient). And if Liberty, which is a private college, has more funds than other Virginia colleges so be it.

  • inlibrarian

    Comparing any university’s reciept of student loan and funds to NPR is comparing apples to oranges in order to stir up emotions. The federal funds went to students, who then chose to use them at Liberty University. I would never say that my grocery store receives federal funding because they accept food stamps.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1663672598 Nick Nikolaides

    “Do as I say, not as I do”

  • westerntc

    The comparison is being made because conservatives want to de-fund NPR due to its alleged liberal content. The implication is, “why not de-fund Liberty students because their education is hyper-conservative?”

    It’s not apples to oranges, it’s Braeburn apples to Fuji apples.

  • http://twitter.com/SCMProfessor Steve

    The first thing that struck me is that Liberty is blocking their own access to the paper. That just seems “odd” and I wonder if it was meant as an intentional action or perhaps some sort of coincidental network glitch–or if they were really attempting to block access to “something else.”

    That said, if I may weigh in on the LU vs NPR discussion, it is an apples to oranges comparison.

    The NPR audience (by their report) tends to be white, affluent, and highly educated. This is a group who can certainly afford to increase their giving to offset any reductions in federal funding. (http://www.wqub.org/media/NPR%20Profile%20stats%202009/NPR%20demographics.pdf)

    Students receiving federal student aid funds on the other hand are by definition students with a financial need. If they received grants they (again, by definition) are unable to afford the education on their own, and are thus in need of the assistance. And let’s not forget that these numbers MAY include federally supported/guaranteed loans that students must pay back, and will be paying back with interest–at a rate currently well above all loan interest rates except credit cards.

    While admittedly many on both sides of the aisle are making the de-funding of NPR a political issue the fact is really this simple: We need to do something to get the federal deficit under control, and it only makes sense to target those programs that could readily be supported through other sources. NPR could, if their listeners wanted, be self supporting. The funding of NPR really does amount to a subsidy for the wealthy–those who could otherwise easily afford to support NPR.

    Remove the politics from this, and ask yourself: If we need to cut funds do we cut for those programs that provide “free” programming for the affluent, or provide education to those that aren’t?

    Just sayin’….

  • ychumanities

    “Remove the politics from this, and ask yourself: If we need to cut funds do we cut for those programs that provide “free” programming for the affluent, or provide education to those that aren’t?”

    Or, ask yourself. If we need to cut funds, do we cut funds to an institution that provides thoughtful and varied broadcast programming to anyone who can access a radio, or to those who take federal tax money and give it to an openly biased, highly politicized and private institution that violates the very premise of a Western, liberal education? A good liberal arts education allows you to see complicated issues from various viewpoints, a skill that cannot be developed by censoring information that contradicts the party line.

  • chilli11

    Conservatives want to defund NPR because there’s a gigantic deficit, and a radio station (particularly one that could support itself) is the epitome of “nonessential”.

  • badger74

    Anyone who has seen a conservative attempt to speak at one of our Ivy League or other highly regarded schools has seen overt censorship as their talks are usually loudly disrupted by student radicals. LU probably made a mistake here but at least it was one they could do legally.

  • chilli11

    Online education may not require classrooms and dorms, but it’s not free. At a school with an annual enrollment under 2500, and with an online program that’s only about 4 years old, we have hundreds of thousands of student records, papers, and “classroom” interactions that we have to archive. Then there’s the necessity of servers to run the site and staff to maintain the servers; the cost of powering a server farm; the staff required to maintain the online ed environment (web application), staff to compile and transcribe lectures for web versions of courses; professors and graders (who often hold master’s or doctoral degrees in the subject). It’s a complicated and expensive enterprise. Now increase that by a factor of 20.

    It’s really important to remember that this is money that the students receive, usually have to pay back, and are free to use at any college or university. Liberty is not getting funding directly.

  • nacrandell

    Actually, I was wondering about the increase of online students and the increase of Federal aid that Liberty receives. The Federal government issues the grants and loans to the student and then the student pays the college or university. Has Liberty University learned how to manipulate the system for the maximum student fees while at the same time supporters of LU advocate reducing other Federal projects?

  • 11274501

    let’s try to remember that funding is driven by student demand. If so many students weren’t DEMANDING an online private christian education then Liberty would not be receiving the funds…

    and I agree with the apples and oranges analogy…

    Odd move to block the newspaper- I wonder why ?????? Have they issued a statement? Who cares thaht they received more money FOR EDUCATION than radio did for NEWS (educationalnews but news none the less). I am probably showing my ignorance here, but is not NPR largely funded by consumer support? Why should this report have been threatening to Liberty? Something doesn’t make sense here….I need more info

  • cwinton

    Talk about a case of biting the hand that feeds you. No wonder Liberty has hired a PR firm to spin this little revelation regarding the extent to which they are recipients of largess that comes from the US taxpayer. For those who say the federal dollars come to the institution indirectly, I’m quite sure Liberty has the usual financial aid office to put together the “package” for each student, something I would hardly consider to be indirect. $445 million is not exactly chump change in this or any institution’s budget, and I’m quite sure Liberty is quite deliberately going after this money full throttle. If their supporters are so eager to chop funds supporting education, perhaps they might try to rein in Liberty as a first step.

  • FUtah2011

    Some liberty they have there at Liberty U.

  • westerntc

    So if I open a madrasa that advocates terrorism and the destruction of the American way of life, and 50,000 students sign up and request financial aid, that’s just peachy?

    You’re over-thinking the whole thing: conservatives don’t want tax dollars supporting liberal entities like NPR, and liberals don’t want tax dollars supporting conservative indoctrination units like Liberty.

  • panthernation

    My favorite Liberty incident was about 12 years ago. I was on their campus, and the student government was proposing a rule to ban “secular” music on campus. Someone finally realized that such a ban would preclude the National Anthem from being played before sporting events. This isn’t exactly relevant to this discussion, but….it does make the response of banning the city newspaper seem rather in touch with their practices.

  • panthernation

    Ummm…there’s a gigantic deficit, and a Liberty education (particularly for students who could support themselves) is the epitome of “nonessential.” Just sayin….

  • chilli11

    @panthernation (I can’t reply to your post for some reason) – The government isn’t giving money to Liberty, they’re giving it to students, and those students aren’t getting government money if they can pay for school themselves.

    Maybe we should severely reduce the amount of student loan money available in general, but at least be honest about the differences here.

  • chilli11

    When did LU start classes on terrorism? Can I audit?

    That is a ridiculous comparison. We’ve gone from apples-oranges to apples-orangutans.

  • westerntc

    Liberty University has a long history of condemning homosexuality. They were even founded by a reverend who blamed the 9/11 attacks on gays and lesbians. Liberty, while having many quality courses, teaches bigoted lessons.

    Should our tax dollars fund an education that blatantly denounces homosexuals as second-class citizens? Many conservatives don’t see a problem with that, just as many liberals don’t see a problem with funding center-left NPR.

    chilli11, obviously you don’t see a problem giving money to an institution that supports bigotry. How about an anti-American madrasa? How about online degree mills that mislead their students? An education is an education is an education, right?

    Calling for de-funding of NPR while keeping mum about the funding of hyper-conservative institutions is hypocrisy born of political sway.

    My point remains: people don’t want their tax dollars supporting institutions with which they politically disagree. Conservatives don’t like liberal causes (braeburn apples), and liberals don’t like conservative causes (fuji apples). Comparing NPR and Liberty is apples to apples.

  • nacrandell

    “It’s really important to remember that this is money that the students receive, usually have to pay back, and are free to use at any college or university. Liberty is not getting funding directly.”

    Exactly – the student assumes responsibility for the loan, but the institution receives the monies for payment of class and student fees. Remember that the grant or loan would not be issued unless the student was enrolled and requesting monies to pay an institution. Or to put it literaturelly, pardon the pun, the Artful Dodger assumes the risk and Fagin keeps the profits.

Copyright 2012. All rights reserved.